2
Convincingness: a model is more convincing if it contains fewer and/or less implausible assumptions. Criteria for modeling: convincingness

3
Convincingness: a model is more convincing if it contains fewer and/or less implausible assumptions. Most convincing: are assumptions logically deducible from other, less problematic assumptions? (example: If we assume on average 1 kW power consumption, and if we assume 100 hours of work, then the energy consumption is 100 kWh: this is a logical necessity, given by the definition of ‘power’, ‘energy’ and ‘average’.) Criteria for modeling: convincingness

4
Convincingness: a model is more convincing if it contains fewer and/or less implausible assumptions. If no logical necessity, are there any first-principle ‘laws’ to back up assumptions ? (example: if this component behaves as a lever, we can use the physical laws of torque in a lever.) Criteria for modeling: convincingness

5
Convincingness: a model is more convincing if it contains fewer and/or less implausible assumptions. If there are no laws available, can we construct a simplified formal model system ? In a formal model system laws do apply (e.g., replace the world + oceans by a homogenous ball covered by a sheet of water). The measure of correspondence between these two is left out of the discussion; convincingness relies on the agreement with empirical data. Criteria for modeling: convincingness

6
Convincingness: a model is more convincing if it contains fewer and/or less implausible assumptions. If formal model system is not possible, can we get support from comparison to observations on an empirical model system ? Examples of empirical model system physical: water tank, wind tunnel physical: water tank, wind tunnel economical, social: comparative populations, historical survey data economical, social: comparative populations, historical survey data biological: the guinea pig! biological: the guinea pig! Criteria for modeling: convincingness

7
Convincingness: a model is more convincing if it contains fewer and/or less implausible assumptions. If even an empirical model system is not possible, is there at least any argument for consistency of the assumptions? (example: price elasticity, ‘fun’ in the taxi model.) Criteria for modeling: convincingness